Until you have explored every nook and cranny of the universe, you cannot make this statement.

__________________I can't believe how strange it is to be anything at all

It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized
discipline. But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion
on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.
--Murray Rothbard

No, it's not. What if there was evidence that you couldn't perceive and assume there is no evidence? What if you misinterpret the signs and assume there is no evidence?

I don't know what word your trying to use, but pretention is not a word and pretension does not seem to fit.

... or if someone claimed the earth were round when everyone believed it was flat. ... or if someone claimed that all objects fall at the same rate. It's not proof. It may seem unlikely and inconsistent, but it's not *proof*.

What if there are a binch of people with beliefs of blind faith? What if these people were to be proven wrong? wouldn't they modify their interpretations and beliefs to continue to have their beliefs fit?

pretension - the advancing of a claim

When the earth was proven to be round it was found that the majority of the people on the planet were wrong, when it was shown that all objects fall at the same rate no matter the size, shape, or weight the majority of the people on the planet were wrong, and since we know that history tends to repeat itself one can be certain that statistically this case should come up with the current world religions. Besides, why don't you beleive in Zeus, Posiedon, Thor, or any other dieteis?

__________________
best porn thread in ST history by ScorpionShock - I was there 6/7 or 6/8 depending on your timezone

__________________I can't believe how strange it is to be anything at all

It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized
discipline. But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion
on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.
--Murray Rothbard

I guess know is as close of a word as I can think of. I know that I have no evidence, but I still have no doubt that there is no god. Know might not be the right word, but believe isn't any closer.

You have complete faith that there is no God.

__________________I can't believe how strange it is to be anything at all

It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized
discipline. But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion
on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.
--Murray Rothbard

Ok, I've finally figured out how to word how I know there is no god so that other people understand. I accept my own thoughts as facts, therefore I have all the factual evidence I need to know there is no god. While those same facts may not seem true to you, they are true to me.

Ok, I've finally figured out how to word how I know there is no god so that other people understand. I accept my own thoughts as facts, therefore I have all the factual evidence I need to know there is no god. While those same facts may not seem true to you, they are true to me.

I'm not going to get into subjective reality right now, but consider this

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mps2216

Agreed. As such, given the fact that I have not experienced God, he does not exist. However, I do not assert that I will not experience him in the future.

That is a logical stance, would you say that you hold that.

__________________I can't believe how strange it is to be anything at all

It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized
discipline. But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion
on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.
--Murray Rothbard

No. That statement implies that there may be a god. I know that the logic I'm using doesn't make all that much sense to other people, but it's how I justify knowing god doesn't exist to myself. I'm not trying to justify it to anyone else.

No. That statement implies that there may be a god. I know that the logic I'm using doesn't make all that much sense to other people, but it's how I justify knowing god doesn't exist to myself. I'm not trying to justify it to anyone else.

So you are defining your knowledge at this current moment as infinite?

__________________I can't believe how strange it is to be anything at all

It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized
discipline. But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion
on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.
--Murray Rothbard

Even though your experience has told you that as time progresses your knowledge has increased you still hold that you have infinite knowledge?

If you do, how do you rectify that contradiction?

__________________I can't believe how strange it is to be anything at all

It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized
discipline. But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion
on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.
--Murray Rothbard

Let me refine my answer a little bit. My knowledge is infinite as far as theology goes. Since I realized I was an atheist, my knowledge in that department hasn't budged.

Better, but you still went from a theist (correct me if I am wrong) to an atheist, your experience has showed you that changing your theological views is entirely possible. And since another change in your theological views would not be a contradiction, it is entirely possible.

And you assert your infinite knowledge of theology, yet I can almost guarantee that you have learned or reevaluated atleast 1 small thing about your philosophy/theology in general. Even if it hasn't changed your view on a greatest scale, it still counts as knowledge.

__________________I can't believe how strange it is to be anything at all

It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized
discipline. But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion
on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.
--Murray Rothbard

Better, but you still went from a theist (correct me if I am wrong) to an atheist, your experience has showed you that changing your theological views is entirely possible. And since another change in your theological views would not be a contradiction, it is entirely possible.

And you assert your infinite knowledge of theology, yet I can almost guarantee that you have learned or reevaluated atleast 1 small thing about your philosophy/theology in general. Even if it hasn't changed your view on a greatest scale, it still counts as knowledge.

The problem with that is when I was a theist, I didn't think there was a god. I was told there was a god. Therefore, my knowledge was not based on my own thoughts, and only my own thoughts can be accepted as fact.

I can't really think of anything that I've learned about theology since I went athest besides learning more about the theology of others, but that doesn't really apply here.

The problem with that is when I was a theist, I didn't think there was a god. I was told there was a god. Therefore, my knowledge was not based on my own thoughts, and only my own thoughts can be accepted as fact.

I can't really think of anything that I've learned about theology since I went athest besides learning more about the theology of others, but that doesn't really apply here.

Even in your trek towards atheism there was a development in your theology, granted it was in the opposite direction, but it was still a change and the opposite can still occur without contradiction. And I am sure you have been in non-theological situations where you have changed your mind once and then went back to your original belief or somewhere in between.

And I am fairly certain that I have forced you to reevaluate some of your beliefs and even if that has caused you to strengthen your belief, it still demonstrates the potential for change.

__________________I can't believe how strange it is to be anything at all

It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized
discipline. But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion
on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.
--Murray Rothbard

Even in your trek towards atheism there was a development in your theology, granted it was in the opposite direction, but it was still a change and the opposite can still occur without contradiction. And I am sure you have been in non-theological situations where you have changed your mind once and then went back to your original belief or somewhere in between.

And I am fairly certain that I have forced you to reevaluate some of your beliefs and even if that has caused you to strengthen your belief, it still demonstrates the potential for change.

Trust me, since I became an atheist, I have never doubted my knowledge once. Hell, I'd like to doubt it and believe in theology, but I can't.

Trust me, since I became an atheist, I have never doubted my knowledge once. Hell, I'd like to doubt it and believe in theology, but I can't.

You don't have to doubt it. All you have to realize is that your knowledge has changed even a little bit, it could even be a change which increased your belief. Would you say that happened?

__________________I can't believe how strange it is to be anything at all

It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized
discipline. But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion
on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.
--Murray Rothbard

I don't think atheism comes in levels. It's kind of a god or no god thing, no inbetween. So, no.

Well that is not true, because if you look at MPS, who calls himself an Atheist, but his atheism is considered to be weak atheism where yours is not.

But so far you are basically saying that you went from not thinking about god at all just accepting it with faithm to a belief in no God: a complete sudden 180 change. And while I don't believe this for a second, would you say that is accurate?

Quote:

Originally Posted by alex06

I know there is no god.

*puts flame suit on*

And to those that know that there is no God:
How can you maintain a position that there is no probability of the existence of a God or higher sentinent being, when the human ability to know is not infinite? How are you any different than the Theist who asserts knowledge of God's existence? And how can you assert the lack of existence with only a lack of evidence?

__________________I can't believe how strange it is to be anything at all

It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized
discipline. But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion
on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.
--Murray Rothbard